Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: [GENERAL] INSTEAD rule bug?

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Dmitry Tkach <dmitry(at)openratings(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-bugs(at)postgresql(dot)org, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] INSTEAD rule bug?
Date: 2003-07-16 04:04:21
Message-ID: 10734.1058328261@sss.pgh.pa.us (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-bugspgsql-general
Dmitry Tkach <dmitry(at)openratings(dot)com> writes:
> It would have saved a lot of trouble if it just complained about that 
> union thing right away and refuse to create the rule...

That's what happens in CVS tip.

> On a different note, I think there *is* a way to add a where clause to 
> the union - that's exactly what I did in that last example - by 
> converting it into a subselect...
> Can that not be done automatically for conditional rules?

Send a patch... or at least convince us it can be done ... I'm not
convinced yet.

			regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

pgsql-bugs by date

Next:From: Wehrle, DanielDate: 2003-07-16 07:37:48
Subject: Re: pg_dump -t option doesn't take schema-qualified table
Previous:From: Dmitry TkachDate: 2003-07-15 21:53:13
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] INSTEAD rule bug?

pgsql-general by date

Next:From: Martijn van OosterhoutDate: 2003-07-16 05:26:20
Subject: Re: perfromance impact of vacuum
Previous:From: Litel WangDate: 2003-07-16 02:51:30
Subject: why can't I find the other schemas in my restored database except public schemas ?

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group